yupper32

7 ms·

31.
by yupper32 4y ago
Just about anything done with poor form or in excess is going to cause issues. Not sure it's a useful point.
32.
by yupper32 4y ago
Running is actually good for your joints. You'll have a hard time finding studies saying otherwise. Running is certainly usually harder for heavier folks, but being bad for your joints is not the reason.
33.
by yupper32 4y ago
Please focus on one thing at a time. I think you're starting to come around to the idea that maybe Wikipedia has an appropriate amount of funding and is spending an appropriate amount of money? You can just keep moving the goal posts e
34.
by yupper32 4y ago
$11mil / 169 = ~$65k / employee. So average pay at Internet Archive is barely over the median salary in the US? That's not good. Salary costs don't need to be looked at as something to aggressively push down. You can tre
35.
by yupper32 4y ago
Maybe they should spend more than $350k and find someone more competent.
36.
by yupper32 4y ago
If you want to compare it based on the people working for each company: Parag has around 3900 employees. Wikipedia has around 550. Around 7x multiplier. $30m / 7 = ~$4.3mil Sundar has around 135k employees. 245x multiplier. $250m &#x2F
37.
by yupper32 4y ago
Those normal people should know that $350k is a steal.
38.
by yupper32 4y ago
Do you just donate to places without looking into their finances and how they spend their money? It's not like wikipedia hides it. It's right on their website: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundatio
39.
by yupper32 4y ago
> But from any normal person's perspective, it's expensive. Why does it matter what that hypothetical "normal" person thinks? Does that "normal" person have insight into how much it costs to hire a competent
40.
by yupper32 4y ago
I'm not disagreeing with the overall premise of the tweet chain. I'm just saying that $350k is pretty cheap for an exec at one of the most viewed/important websites on the planet.
41.
by yupper32 4y ago
Sure but pointing out $350k executive salaries as somehow lavish is strange. That seems low for an executive at one of the most important (or at least, most viewed) websites on the planet.
42.
by yupper32 4y ago
All business, all the time! No fun allowed!
43.
by yupper32 4y ago
I think it was a good aside. 1. It makes it more evergreen. 2. The excited/super invested explanations are funny. 3. It leads into the joke that Jim doesn't believe that Pam ever saw it hit the corner.
44.
by yupper32 4y ago
Anyone who uses the internet, for one. Have you ever listened to congressional hearings related to tech? Folks from congress have no idea what's going on. They're focused on the wrong issues, ask insane questions, and at the end o
45.
by yupper32 4y ago
Note: this website seems completely independent from the US government, despite its official appearance.
46.
by yupper32 4y ago
The real danger is the lack of technical literacy in the world.
47.
by yupper32 4y ago
Pretty much every generation makes the same mistake you're making right now by writing off whatever the younger generation is focusing their time on. You can find quotes from 1000 years ago with the same exact sentiment as your comment
48.
by yupper32 4y ago
In my experience those who implement before process leave out important cross team requirements and/or blow their political capital right away. Or they spend their time doing things like unsolicited refactors or migrations or rearchite
49.
by yupper32 4y ago
I've had people on my team with these views and often their expectations need to be re-calibrated. They want to spend their time rewriting the codebase their way instead of being actually productive. Those people are not 10x engineers,
50.
by yupper32 4y ago
> its painful for existing senior software engineers to welcome one on the team Huh? Why would that be?
51.
by yupper32 4y ago
I'm at the 2x mark with my wife. It's both your money. Jealous and bitter? Her money? You both just need to grow up and realize you're married and on the same team. It might be different if you were both struggling to make en
52.
by yupper32 4y ago
> He will get some kind of legal consequence ... eventually. I don't see how you could possibly be confident of that. Even if he is absolutely guilty and gets to the point of a trial, which alone is a huge huge huge huge step, he ma
53.
by yupper32 4y ago
That's ridiculous. If I created a service and the government happened to start using it, my service being taken down should not be labeled a national security issue against me. The national security issue would be the government decidi
54.
by yupper32 4y ago
A security concern for the governments, not twitter. It's not twitter's fault that governments are using it as a primary form of communication, nor should it be their responsibility to have amazing uptime just because governments
55.
by yupper32 4y ago
Could be targeting tourists.
56.
by yupper32 4y ago
Dumped as word isn't the incorrect English. The formation of the question is the incorrect English. Correct: He dumped his clothes on the bed. Incorrect: Why he dumped his clothes on the bed? Correct: Why did he dump his clothes on the
57.
by yupper32 4y ago
> Getting rid leaded avgas Isn't that more chemical engineering? Boom sounds mostly mechanical. > moving away from fossil fuels altogether which includes fields like energy storage and electric propulsion Isn't this mostly b
58.
by yupper32 4y ago
Take home tests are never just an hour. They're open ended traps designed to find out who is willing to put in unpaid overtime. The OP themselves admitted to expanding the scope of a take home test they were given by around 10x because
59.
by yupper32 4y ago
So do you have applicants write a 4 endpoint API with flask, or do you have them implement an elevator system which you describe as very hard? I've actually given that question in an hour long interview. But guess what? They get to s
60.
by yupper32 4y ago
Those are a lot of words that could be empty. It's easy for me to see the red flags: 1. Mentioning firing in the very first post when talking about hiring. 2. Take home interview tests, showing you don't value your potential emplo

More ›